3 ms·

It sounds you're saying the article was oversimplifying complex problems because in the real world it's not so easy to just eat less/better and move more to loo

It sounds you're saying the article was oversimplifying complex problems because in the real world it's not so easy to just eat less/better and move more to loose weight. I think you may be missing the distinction he was making between simple and easy. I think fundamentally the problem of loosing weight is not particularly complex[1]. But for many people it is quite hard to do. We may have psychological issues with choosing the right foods, we may have other things we want or need to do instead of exercising, there could be many things that make it hard to do the things we need to to be healthy. And because it's hard for us we are vulnerable to someone selling us an 'easy' solution. Of course, solving our psychological issues, or finding the time or willpower to exercise, or making the money to buy healthy food or the time to cook it are all different problems. And those problems can be quite complex. 1. This recent HN discussion goes into it in more detail. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28597975 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28597975

munificent 5y ago
I understand the distinction between simple and easy. Digging a pool in your back yard is simple. It's not easy. (The author is incorrect about running marathons. Running a marathon is complex.) > I think fundamentally the problem of loosing weight is not particularly complex. My point is that any definition of "fundamental" in this sentence that discards the essential humanity and cultural context of the person losing weight ends up with a "problem" that is in no meaningful, actionable way based in reality. The fact that it is a real living breathing human who has a life and a day job who is trying to lose weight is essential complexity. Arguing otherwise is akin to saying that putting an astronaut on the moon is simple: just fire a ballistic missile at it. Oh, what, the astronaut needs oxygen, hydration, and can only handle a certain amount of acceleration before turning into a reddish paste? Well, that's just "artificial" complexity and it's their fault for having a body that is so poorly engineered.

munificent 5y ago

I understand the distinction between simple and easy. Digging a pool in your back yard is simple. It's not easy. (The author is incorrect about running marathons. Running a marathon is complex.) > I think fundamentally the problem of loosing weight is not particularly complex. My point is that any definition of "fundamental" in this sentence that discards the essential humanity and cultural context of the person losing weight ends up with a "problem" that is in no meaningful, actionable way based in reality. The fact that it is a real living breathing human who has a life and a day job who is trying to lose weight is essential complexity. Arguing otherwise is akin to saying that putting an astronaut on the moon is simple: just fire a ballistic missile at it. Oh, what, the astronaut needs oxygen, hydration, and can only handle a certain amount of acceleration before turning into a reddish paste? Well, that's just "artificial" complexity and it's their fault for having a body that is so poorly engineered.